Jump to content
British Speedway Forum
iwright71

Rob Godfrey interview in Speedway Star

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, GWC said:

Some promoters are not blessed with the intelligence to handle situations and have probably got where they are in life by bullying.

Rob Godfrey strikes me as an intelligent man who cares passionately about this sport but one or two others are not.

As has been said the welfare of the sport is paramount and a need for ALL promoters to work together now more than ever.

A lot of really good experienced promoters have gone out of speedway which is not good for the sport...they must have seen this dreadful situation was going to happen.

Godfrey maybe be passionate about his club but I can assure He is certainly not an intelligent man. He is clueless. Along with his mate Chapman, another back woodsman, he has overseen the worst and most disastrous period in recent history of the sport. These two will go down as the fools that finished off speedway. IMO I think it’s too late but for the good of sport both he and Chapman should go. 

  • Thanks 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Speedtiger said:

A lot of really good experienced promoters have gone out of speedway which is not good for the sport...they must have seen this dreadful situation was going to happen.

Godfrey maybe be passionate about his club but I can assure He is certainly not an intelligent man. He is clueless. Along with his mate Chapman, another back woodsman, he has overseen the worst and most disastrous period in recent history of the sport. These two will go down as the fools that finished off speedway. IMO I think it’s too late but for the good of sport both he and Chapman should go. 

GO where? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, PHILIPRISING said:

GO where? 

Out of the BSPA (management) as Chairman and Vice Chairman. They have totally failed miserably.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 2/13/2019 at 4:55 AM, Sidney the robin said:

Those riders i named were revered because the simple facts were they were great riders four of them World champions.I don't remember them because they were getting a 15 point max at  Exeter on Monday night and then only dropping the odd point here and there giving them inflated averages.

Yes you do and it absolutely ridiculous to suggest otherwise. That's how all riders are judged.

When riders win the majority of their races they are considered great riders.

The less they win, the less great they are considered.

I'd love to hear how you and Steve Roberts 'judge' riders if it's not based on how often they win. Strangely you've never listed any riders whom you classed as 'world class' who didn't do the exact thing which you say you don't judge riders on...

 

 

Edited by BWitcher

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

it's been explained to Sidney about 50 times ..he never going to understand 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, BWitcher said:

Yes you do and it absolutely ridiculous to suggest otherwise. That's how all riders are judged.

When riders win the majority of their races they are considered great riders.

The less they win, the less great they are considered.

I'd love to hear how you and Steve Roberts 'judge' riders if it's not based on how often they win. Strangely you've never listed any riders whom you classed as 'world class' who didn't do the exact thing which you say you don't judge riders on...

 

 

...seeing that you've raised my name (by presumably checking on those who register 'likes') it's been covered many times elsewhere on other threads on how I 'judge' riders great or otherwise depending upon the criteria over the months and years on the BSF. Indeed you only need to consult 'The Greatest/Favourites Lists' threads, for example, to see some of my comments and/or observations regarding riders if you so wish to help clarify any misunderstanding and/or confusion that you may have.

Edited by steve roberts

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
33 minutes ago, BWitcher said:

Yes you do and it absolutely ridiculous to suggest otherwise. That's how all riders are judged.

When riders win the majority of their races they are considered great riders.

The less they win, the less great they are considered.

I'd love to hear how you and Steve Roberts 'judge' riders if it's not based on how often they win. Strangely you've never listed any riders whom you classed as 'world class' who didn't do the exact thing which you say you don't judge riders on...

 

 

Looking back over old programmes it is surprising the number of riders that my memory tells me were very good weren’t actually all that consistent, it’s just that I have been judging them on the basis of a few great races I remember and one tends to forget the ones they don’t do so well. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
48 minutes ago, BWitcher said:

Yes you do and it absolutely ridiculous to suggest otherwise. That's how all riders are judged.

When riders win the majority of their races they are considered great riders.

The less they win, the less great they are considered.

I'd love to hear how you and Steve Roberts 'judge' riders if it's not based on how often they win. Strangely you've never listed any riders whom you classed as 'world class' who didn't do the exact thing which you say you don't judge riders on...

 

 

My experience Witcher i never really went on averages and reputation more on what i felt individually.Me and you have differed on this subject  endlessly but i know your points are good  and they could well  be right.My take on things was that in yesteryear you really looked forward to a classy no 1 being in opposition often you might only see him once a year and maybe another individual meeting if you are lucky.Steve Roberts see Nielsen in his prime everyweek i did 84/87  so he knows more about Hans than me or anyone at Oxford.I don't  disagree with you Witcher also your input on Ermolenko  ( like Steve you know Sam's career) is interesting you see him for a long period and you are really qualified to comment.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
44 minutes ago, Sidney the robin said:

My experience Witcher i never really went on averages and reputation more on what i felt individually.Me and you have differed on this subject  endlessly but i know your points are good  and they could well  be right.My take on things was that in yesteryear you really looked forward to a classy no 1 being in opposition often you might only see him once a year and maybe another individual meeting if you are lucky.Steve Roberts see Nielsen in his prime everyweek i did 84/87  so he knows more about Hans than me or anyone at Oxford.I don't  disagree with you Witcher also your input on Ermolenko  ( like Steve you know Sam's career) is interesting you see him for a long period and you are really qualified to comment.

Always irritated me that "Rebel With A Cause' Garry Middleton often had the beating of Briggo but encountered problems when up against Martin Ashby!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
54 minutes ago, steve roberts said:

Always irritated me that "Rebel With A Cause' Garry Middleton often had the beating of Briggo but encountered problems when up against Martin Ashby!

I remember him losing his rag after being excluded from a race at West Ham, and leaving his bike across the track.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Sidney the robin said:

My experience Witcher i never really went on averages and reputation more on what i felt individually.Me and you have differed on this subject  endlessly but i know your points are good  and they could well  be right.My take on things was that in yesteryear you really looked forward to a classy no 1 being in opposition often you might only see him once a year and maybe another individual meeting if you are lucky.Steve Roberts see Nielsen in his prime everyweek i did 84/87  so he knows more about Hans than me or anyone at Oxford.I don't  disagree with you Witcher also your input on Ermolenko  ( like Steve you know Sam's career) is interesting you see him for a long period and you are really qualified to comment.

Averages is irrelevant. 

The rest of your post is my entire point! That's entirely due to a large league. A smaller league you're seeing the riders much more often, and they are beating each other more often.. it's simply natural they don't have that mystique about them as you're seeing them lose a lot more regularly.

Remember, the real 'top' boys will still be the top boys.. but the second and third heat leaders won't appear as good.

Another way of putting it.. a fan just watching GP racing would think Craig Cook and Chris Harris are garbage.. a fan watching Craig Cook for Edinburgh over the years thinks he's brilliant.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, steve roberts said:

...seeing that you've raised my name (by presumably checking on those who register 'likes') it's been covered many times elsewhere on other threads on how I 'judge' riders great or otherwise depending upon the criteria over the months and years on the BSF. Indeed you only need to consult 'The Greatest/Favourites Lists' threads, for example, to see some of my comments and/or observations regarding riders if you so wish to help clarify any misunderstanding and/or confusion that you may have.

You judge riders by how many races they win. End of story.

Anyone who tries to claim differently is talking absolute nonsense. 

Now you can apply different criteria and importance to particular races or events but the simple reality is, the more you see a rider win, the better you will naturally think they are. 

Nowhere is there someone claiming a rider was brilliant who comes last every race. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, BWitcher said:

You judge riders by how many races they win. End of story.

Anyone who tries to claim differently is talking absolute nonsense. 

Now you can apply different criteria and importance to particular races or events but the simple reality is, the more you see a rider win, the better you will naturally think they are. 

Nowhere is there someone claiming a rider was brilliant who comes last every race. 

I can honestly say that I haven't a clue what you are going on about and why you think I've made such judgements and/or quotes on other threads regarding same. End of.

 

 

 

judge' riders if it's not ba.textClipping

Edited by steve roberts

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, steve roberts said:

I can honestly say that I haven't a clue what you are going on about and why you think I've made such judgements and/or quotes on other threads regarding same. End of.

 

 

 

judge' riders if it's not ba.textClipping

Every time Sidney claims he doesn't judge riders by how many races they win you 'like' his posts.

Every time Sidney refuses to accept that the size of the league dictates how many heat leaders there are you 'like' his post.

It's not a difficult concept. I've for some time been against the merging of leagues but we are past the point of salvation now for a top flight, or indeed any level of league it seems. Perhaps the only way out of this is to go with a big league, create more heat leaders, create more 'top guys' who don't lose very often and generate excitement when teams visit with a No 1 who doesn't get beat often and you will only get to see at your track once that season.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, BWitcher said:

Every time Sidney claims he doesn't judge riders by how many races they win you 'like' his posts.

Every time Sidney refuses to accept that the size of the league dictates how many heat leaders there are you 'like' his post.

It's not a difficult concept. I've for some time been against the merging of leagues but we are past the point of salvation now for a top flight, or indeed any level of league it seems. Perhaps the only way out of this is to go with a big league, create more heat leaders, create more 'top guys' who don't lose very often and generate excitement when teams visit with a No 1 who doesn't get beat often and you will only get to see at your track once that season.

Oh dear...you do have a fixation with people registering 'likes'. Because one may register a 'like' it doesn't necessarily mean one agrees with all of the statement made...perhaps just one part of same and it doesn't always require or justify a counter statement to clarify same. Many on here apparently do the same when registering a 'like' on some subject or other and if one reads any given response, if indeed forthcoming, often offers clarification. Infact some register a 'like' and then proceed to completely disagree with the post! In a nutshell one shouldn't read too much into a registered 'like'...it can mean one of many things.

As regards the forming of one league I can see the advantages to this but as I've stated elsewhere it would require the full co-operation of all participating promoters and as history has proven many times in the past this has sometimes proved difficult although 1965 did prove to be a turning point and saviour of the sport when the National and Provincial Leagues were merged.

 

Edited by steve roberts
  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now

×

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue. Privacy Policy